Conference track: K‐12 civic and learning outcomes
Format: Poster presentation
Summary
This quantitative study surveys service-learning teachers for the purpose of determining the amount of student voice in their service-learning projects and identifying the factors that influence the varying amounts of student voice.
Student voice is a key component of quality service-learning. The K-12 Service-Learning Standards for Quality Practice indicate, “Service-learning provides youth with a strong voice in planning, implementing, and evaluating service-learning experiences with guidance from adults” (NYLC, 2008, p. 3). Not only should youth openly express and generate ideas for planning, implementation, and evaluation, youth should be involved “in the decision-making process throughout the service-learning experiences” (NYLC, 2008, p. 3). Student voice fosters student ownership of the project. Student ownership, in turn, cultivates self efficacy (Deimer, Voight, & Mark, 2010; Mitra, 2007), develops political efficacy (Morgan & Streb, 2001) and leadership skills (Terry, 2003), and contributes to higher levels of school engagement (Billig, Root, & Jesse, 2007) and improves civic outcomes (Billig, Root, & Jesse, 2005). Billig (2000) concluded that student voice maximizes the positive outcomes associated with service-learning.
This study examines: 1) the amount of voice in service-learning projects; 2) during which phase(s) of the project that voice occurred; and 3) the relationship between students’ characteristics (age, prior service-learning exposure, maturity as judged by teachers, community knowledge as judged by teachers), characteristics of the teachers (years of teaching, previous experience with service-learning, style of teaching, perceived level of trust of students), and characteristics of the school (location, size, grade level, type, amount of student voice in the school, emphasis on standards and adherence to set curriculum, amount of service-learning in the school). Implications of these findings for service-learning and teacher training, practical applications for K-12 classroom teachers, and areas for future research will be discussed.
References
Ammon, M. S. (2002). Probing and prompting teachers’ thinking about service-learning: Toward a theory of teacher development. In S. H. Billig & A. Furco (Eds.), Service learning through a multidisciplinary lens (pp. 33–54). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
Billig, S. H. (2000, May). Research on K-12 school-based service-learning: The evidence builds. Phi Delta Kappan, 658–664.
Billig, S. H., Root, S. C., & Jesse, D. (2005). The relationship between the quality indicators of service-learning and student outcomes: Testing professional wisdom. In S. C. Root, J. Callahan, & S. H. Billig (Eds.), Improving service-learning practices: Research on models to enhance impact (pp. 97–118). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
Billig, S. H., Root, S. C., & Jesse, D. (2007). The impact of participation in service-learning on high school students’ academic and civic participation. Denver, CO: RMC Research Corporation.
Camino, L. (2005). Pitfalls and promising practice of youth-adult partnerships: An evaluator’s reflections. Journal of Community Psychology, 33(1), 75–85.
Corporation for National and Community Service. (2006). Educating for active citizenship: Service-learning, school based service, and civic engagement. Washington, DC: Author.
Deimer, M. A., Voight, A. M., & Mark, C. (2010). Youth development in traditional and transformational service-learning programs. In P. Stewart & N. Webster (Eds.), Problematizing service-learning: Critical reflections for development and action (pp. 155–173). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York, NY: Free Press.
Dymond, S. K., Renzaglia, A., & Chun, E. (2007). Elements of effective high school service learning programs that include students with and without disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 28(4), 227–242.
Epstein, S. E. (2010). Who’s in charge: Examining the complex nature of student voice in service-learning projects. In P. Stewart & N. Webster (Eds.), Problematizing service-learning: Critical reflections for development and action (pp. 175–200). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Fredericks, L., Kaplan, E., & Zeisler, J. (2001). Integrating youth voice in service-learning: Learning indeed issue paper. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.
Gent, P. J. (2009). Great ideas: Using service-learning and differentiated instruction to help your students succeed. Baltimore, MD: P. H. Brookes.
Holt, J. (1970). What do I do Monday? New York, NY: Dell.
Mitra, D. L. (2007). The role of administrators in enabling youth adult partnerships in schools. NASSP Bulletin, 91(3), 237–256.
Morgan, W., & Streb, M. (2001). Building citizenship: How student voice in service-learning develops civic values. Social Science Quarterly, 82(1), 155–169.
National Youth Leadership Council. (2008). K-12 Service-learning standards for quality practice. St. Paul, MN: Author
Neill, A. S. (1972). Summerhill. New York, NY: Pelican.
Scales, P. C., Blyth, D. A., Berkas, T. H., & Kielsmeier, J. C. (2000). The effects of service-learning on middle school students’ social reasonability and academic success. Journal of Early Adolescence, 20(3), 332–358.
Terry, A. W. (2003). Effects of service learning on young, gifted adolescents and their community. Gifted Child Quarterly, 47(4), 295–308.
Wade, R. C. (2007). Service-learning for social justice in the elementary classroom: Can we get there from here? Equity and Excellence in Education, 40, 156–165.
To access materials from this session please click on the file link(s) below:
Pamela Gent, Professor, Clarion University [pgent@clarion.edu]
Keywords: Quantitative study, student voice, teacher perception, K-12
Conference track: K‐12 civic and learning outcomes
Format: Poster presentation
Summary
This quantitative study surveys service-learning teachers for the purpose of determining the amount of student voice in their service-learning projects and identifying the factors that influence the varying amounts of student voice.
Student voice is a key component of quality service-learning. The K-12 Service-Learning Standards for Quality Practice indicate, “Service-learning provides youth with a strong voice in planning, implementing, and evaluating service-learning experiences with guidance from adults” (NYLC, 2008, p. 3). Not only should youth openly express and generate ideas for planning, implementation, and evaluation, youth should be involved “in the decision-making process throughout the service-learning experiences” (NYLC, 2008, p. 3). Student voice fosters student ownership of the project. Student ownership, in turn, cultivates self efficacy (Deimer, Voight, & Mark, 2010; Mitra, 2007), develops political efficacy (Morgan & Streb, 2001) and leadership skills (Terry, 2003), and contributes to higher levels of school engagement (Billig, Root, & Jesse, 2007) and improves civic outcomes (Billig, Root, & Jesse, 2005). Billig (2000) concluded that student voice maximizes the positive outcomes associated with service-learning.
This study examines: 1) the amount of voice in service-learning projects; 2) during which phase(s) of the project that voice occurred; and 3) the relationship between students’ characteristics (age, prior service-learning exposure, maturity as judged by teachers, community knowledge as judged by teachers), characteristics of the teachers (years of teaching, previous experience with service-learning, style of teaching, perceived level of trust of students), and characteristics of the school (location, size, grade level, type, amount of student voice in the school, emphasis on standards and adherence to set curriculum, amount of service-learning in the school). Implications of these findings for service-learning and teacher training, practical applications for K-12 classroom teachers, and areas for future research will be discussed.
References
Ammon, M. S. (2002). Probing and prompting teachers’ thinking about service-learning: Toward a theory of teacher development. In S. H. Billig & A. Furco (Eds.), Service learning through a multidisciplinary lens (pp. 33–54). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
Billig, S. H. (2000, May). Research on K-12 school-based service-learning: The evidence builds. Phi Delta Kappan, 658–664.
Billig, S. H., Root, S. C., & Jesse, D. (2005). The relationship between the quality indicators of service-learning and student outcomes: Testing professional wisdom. In S. C. Root, J. Callahan, & S. H. Billig (Eds.), Improving service-learning practices: Research on models to enhance impact (pp. 97–118). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
Billig, S. H., Root, S. C., & Jesse, D. (2007). The impact of participation in service-learning on high school students’ academic and civic participation. Denver, CO: RMC Research Corporation.
Camino, L. (2005). Pitfalls and promising practice of youth-adult partnerships: An evaluator’s reflections. Journal of Community Psychology, 33(1), 75–85.
Corporation for National and Community Service. (2006). Educating for active citizenship: Service-learning, school based service, and civic engagement. Washington, DC: Author.
Deimer, M. A., Voight, A. M., & Mark, C. (2010). Youth development in traditional and transformational service-learning programs. In P. Stewart & N. Webster (Eds.), Problematizing service-learning: Critical reflections for development and action (pp. 155–173). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York, NY: Free Press.
Dymond, S. K., Renzaglia, A., & Chun, E. (2007). Elements of effective high school service learning programs that include students with and without disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 28(4), 227–242.
Epstein, S. E. (2010). Who’s in charge: Examining the complex nature of student voice in service-learning projects. In P. Stewart & N. Webster (Eds.), Problematizing service-learning: Critical reflections for development and action (pp. 175–200). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Fredericks, L., Kaplan, E., & Zeisler, J. (2001). Integrating youth voice in service-learning: Learning indeed issue paper. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.
Gent, P. J. (2009). Great ideas: Using service-learning and differentiated instruction to help your students succeed. Baltimore, MD: P. H. Brookes.
Holt, J. (1970). What do I do Monday? New York, NY: Dell.
Mitra, D. L. (2007). The role of administrators in enabling youth adult partnerships in schools. NASSP Bulletin, 91(3), 237–256.
Morgan, W., & Streb, M. (2001). Building citizenship: How student voice in service-learning develops civic values. Social Science Quarterly, 82(1), 155–169.
National Youth Leadership Council. (2008). K-12 Service-learning standards for quality practice. St. Paul, MN: Author
Neill, A. S. (1972). Summerhill. New York, NY: Pelican.
Scales, P. C., Blyth, D. A., Berkas, T. H., & Kielsmeier, J. C. (2000). The effects of service-learning on middle school students’ social reasonability and academic success. Journal of Early Adolescence, 20(3), 332–358.
Terry, A. W. (2003). Effects of service learning on young, gifted adolescents and their community. Gifted Child Quarterly, 47(4), 295–308.
Wade, R. C. (2007). Service-learning for social justice in the elementary classroom: Can we get there from here? Equity and Excellence in Education, 40, 156–165.
To access materials from this session please click on the file link(s) below: